§ 7. Mr. SpellarTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport what representations he has received regarding the continuation of concessionary fare schemes; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. FreemanI have received several representations about the continuation of concessionary fare schemes. Such schemes are a matter for the local authorities concerned, not for the Government.
§ Mr. SpellarDoes the Minister recognise that that was an unsatisfactory response? Concessionary fare schemes and bus passes are a vital lifeline for many pensioners: for many they are the difference between existing and living. Why will not the Minister make a straightforward statement that the Government are committed to the continuation of these enormously important schemes and that they will do everything in their power to ensure that the schemes remain? Why will not the Minister give pensioners some assurance and give them a straightforward answer? Yes or no—will he protect the schemes?
§ Mr. FreemanConcessionary fare schemes specifically for buses, but also for other forms of local public transport, are the responsibility of local government, not central Government. Local authorities, including passenger transport authorities, have the responsibility for ranking their schemes in priority. It is a matter for local government.
§ Mr. FormanCan my hon. Friend confirm that, during the fairly long period in which concessionary fare schemes 562 have operated, especially in the Greater London area, most local authorities have acted responsibly and have seen fit to maintain the schemes?
§ Mr. FreemanI am grateful to my hon. Friend. He will know that local authorities in Greater London currently provide about £120 million a year for concessionary fare schemes. Local authorities in London are to be congratulated on continuing to support such schemes. It must be for other local authorities to fix their own priorities and continue such schemes as they see fit.
§ Mr. SnapeInstead of hiding behind the local authority smokescreen, why does not the Minister acknowledge that it was the irrational and arbitary decision of the late Lord Ridley to prevent local authorities from acting as precepting authorities which has brought about the present financial problems and the direct threat to concessionary fares? For once, cannot Ministers tell the truth and admit their responsibilities?
§ Mr. FreemanThe advantage of the levying system in comparison with the old precepting system is that passenger transport authorities have to reach agreement with local district councils about the political priorities. That seems to be essentially democratic and I believe that the system should continue.
§ Mr. DickensWould not it be extraordinary if those who win the franchises for the various railway networks did not continue the concessionary railcard scheme? Is not it a way of attracting more passengers? Indeed, the new franchisees may even come up with better ideas. Am I right in saying that the Railways Bill makes the provision of railcards for disabled people an obligation?
§ Mr. FreemanRailcards are different from local authority concessionary fare schemes. I agree with my hon. Friend that British Rail introduced the cards not as a result of pressure from Government or individual Ministers, or parliamentary legislation, but for good commercial reasons. There is no reason to believe that franchisees will not wish to continue to provide the same service.
§ Mr. PrescottIs the Minister aware that his own Government, in the London Regional Transport (Amendment) Act 1985, took statutory powers to force local authorities to impose a concessionary scheme for London pensioners? Why does he draw a distinction between the two schemes?
§ Mr. FreemanThe hon. Gentleman will know that local authorities have always arrived at voluntary agreements. The Act contains a reserve power, but authorities have reached voluntary agreements every year since they have had responsibility for these matters and I believe that they will continue to do so.